Leader of the House of Lords

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and Home Office: Written Questions

Lord Jopling: To ask the Leader of the House what plans he has to seek explanations from (1) the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and (2) the Home Office, concerning their failure to respond to Questions for Written Answer tabled in June and July, contrary to the convention that answers should be provided within 10 working days.

Lord True: As Leader of the House, I shall take my responsibility to ensure all Ministers provide full, timely and accurate responses to Questions for Written Answers (QWAs) very seriously.On 7 September 2022 there were four overdue QWAs directed to the Home Office (HO), and one directed to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). As of 28 September 2022, the number of outstanding QWAs from June and July had reduced: the Home Office had two late answers and the FCDO had none.My office contacted the FCDO who explained that a technical error prevented their response from being uploaded to the website by the deadline. They have confirmed that a response was issued on 20 July 2022 and a copy was sent via email to the Peer.Similarly, the HO has confirmed their two outstanding QWAs were cleared on 11 July but due to a separate technical error, were not uploaded to the website. This issue is being investigated by the HO to prevent it reoccurring. The tabling Peer has been contacted.As Leader, I will undertake to remind colleagues of the importance of answering QWAs within the 10 day target, as well as their obligation to the House and Parliament’s important role in scrutinising the Government. My office will continue to work closely with all Departments across Government, and, upon the House’s return, I will write to colleagues to ensure all Ministers in the House of Lords are aware of their duties and what is expected of them in fulfilling their duty to be accountable to your Lordships’ House.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Genocide

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risk of identity-based violence and mass atrocities in (1) Nigeria, (2) Myanmar, (3) Ukraine, (4) Iraq, (5) northern Syria, (6) China, and (7) India; and when such an assessment was conducted last for each of these countries.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The risk of mass atrocities in countries affected by conflict is covered in an FCDO global conflict and instability risk assessment process which is undertaken multiple times a year.

Development Aid: Conflict Prevention

Lord Alton of Liverpool: To ask His Majesty's Government what progress has been made by the Office for Conflict, Stabilisation and Mediation in creating a dedicated hub to (1) design, and (2) test, a comprehensive approach to upstream conflict and conflict-related atrocity prevention.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The Office for Conflict, Stabilisation and Mediation (OCSM) has established a Conflict and Atrocity Prevention Department that leads on anticipating and mitigating conflicts and mass atrocities. The department focusses on tackling the underlying drivers of emerging conflict and mass atrocities, rapidly responding to crises and supporting the UK's efforts to deny adversaries space in conflict to advance their interests. The department is deepening analysis in key contexts, testing and improving our monitoring capabilities and implementing conflict prevention interventions in a small sample of countries, working with geographic teams to drive ambitious UK policy built on evidence.

Dengue Fever: Research

Baroness Northover: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact that cuts to Official Development Assistance have had on research projects concerning dengue fever in the UK.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The UK Government, through the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, have made significant investments in global health research for novel health technologies and implementation research to combat diseases of poverty, including HIV, TB and malaria as well as Neglected Tropical Diseases. The FCDO has not supported direct research on dengue fever although it is addressed indirectly through our health systems research programmes and our support to technology development programmes such as the Liverpool based Innovative Vector Control Consortium (IVCC).

Tigray: Armed Conflict

Baroness Goudie: To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they will take to ensure the withdrawal of Eritrean forces from Tigray, given the renewed fighting in that region.

Baroness Goudie: To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with international partners regarding the involvement of Eritrean Defence Forces in the renewed conflict in Tigray.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The breakdown of the truce between the Tigray People's Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Ethiopian Government and the renewed involvement of Eritrea is catastrophic for Ethiopia. The UK encourages international efforts to de-escalate conflict, stressing the need for a political solution, humanitarian access and accountability.On 22 September, in a meeting with Ethiopia's Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Development raised the impact of renewed conflict on the humanitarian crisis in northern Ethiopia and reiterated calls for a truce, restoration of humanitarian access to Tigray and for Eritrean forces to leave. Following this, the Minister for Africa tweeted about the escalation of fighting and the involvement of Eritrean forces, again calling on them to leave Tigray. Our Embassies in Addis Ababa and Asmara continue to engage with parties to the conflict to deliver these messages.

Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria

Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick: To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to issue a formal pledge to assist the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The UK remains a committed supporter to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (the Global Fund) and will formally announce a pledge in support of the Global Fund's seventh replenishment (2023-2025) in the coming weeks.

Israel: Palestinians

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel regarding a raid by the Israeli Defence Forces on St Andrew’s Episcopal Church in Ramallah on 18 August; and whether they have asked them to undertake an investigation into that incident.

The Lord Bishop of Southwark: To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have made to the government of Israel regarding a raid by the Israeli Defence Forces on the offices of seven Palestinian civil society organisations in Ramallah on 18 August.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon: We believe the Israeli government's decision to designate six Palestinian NGOs as terrorist organisations and the raids on their offices and on St Andrew's Church in Ramallah are deeply troubling developments. Civil society organisations play an important role in upholding human rights and democracy, they must be able to operate freely in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs). We continue to engage with a number of these organisations and the UK stands in solidarity with Christian communities in the OPTs. The UK remains committed to working with all parties across the Holy Land to ensure the safety and security of the holy sites and all who worship there, including Christians from all nations. During her recent visit to Israel and the OPTs in June 2022, the former Minister of State for Asia and the Middle East met with human rights defenders, journalists and civil society organisations to discuss the pressures they face in the region.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Water Companies: Regulation

Baroness Redfern: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the joint working of Ofwat and the Environment Agency in regulating water companies; and what assessment they have made of (1) the effectiveness of such working, and (2) whether the division of responsibilities has led to weaker sanctions being applied.

Lord Benyon: HM Government considers that the interests of both the environment and consumers are best protected with separate bodies for environmental and economic regulation. There are regular discussions between Ofwat and the Environment Agency to facilitate regulation of water companies, as well as with the Drinking Water Inspectorate and Defra. Ofwat’s price review process incentivises and penalises companies in relation to their performance, resulting in companies having to return money to customers where they fail to meet relevant performance commitments. Ofwat and the Environment Agency work closely to agree those performance commitments related to environmental performance. Enforcement action against water companies is strengthened because of Ofwat and the Environment Agency having differing routes and tools for sanctions. Ofwat can take enforcement action where companies either fail to comply with their statutory duties and licence obligations or are likely to do so. Ofwat’s enforcement sanction options include enforcement orders, and it can directly impose financial penalties, secure formal undertakings from companies (that previously included money being returned to their customers in respect of their failings) and fines paid to the Treasury’s Consolidated Fund. The Environment Agency’s enforcement powers are focused more on individual incidents and sites and include intervention orders, civil sanctions and criminal proceedings, when fines can be imposed as part of the sentencing. Since 2015, the Environment Agency has brought 54 prosecutions against water companies, securing fines of almost £140 million. In June 2019, Ofwat imposed a penalty package on Southern Water of £126 million for spills of wastewater into the environment from its sewerage plants and for deliberately misreporting its performance, which contravened both statutory obligations and licence conditions. £3 million was paid as a fine, while £123 million will be reimbursed to Southern Water’s customers. They received a £17 rebate in 2020/21 and will receive an £11 rebate in each of the following four years. In parallel, the Environment Agency brought a criminal case against Southern Water for widespread and long-term breaches of environmental law. The case saw pollution offences from 16 wastewater treatment works and one storm overflow brought together in a single prosecution. The £90 million fine was the largest imposed against a water company, because of a prosecution bought by the Environment Agency. In November 2021, the two regulators launched the largest ever criminal and civil investigations into water company operation of their sewage treatment works, considering over 2200 treatment works. This followed new data coming to light because of increased monitoring programmes the Environment Agency and Ofwat had required and funded. To date, Ofwat has opened enforcement cases with six companies, whilst all other water and sewerage companies in England and Wales remain subject to its ongoing investigation. HM Government will always consider the learning and outcomes of reports and inquiries to ensure effective regulation and enforcement in the water sector. This will include the outcomes of the House of Lord’s Industry and Regulators Committee’s current inquiry ‘The Work of Ofwat’, which is considering the regulator’s relationship with HM Government and the other regulators.